|
I've really been feeling burned out on civ vi recently, but am still craving this type of game. Does anyone have good things to say about the more recent similar games? Humankind, old world, millennium etc?
|
# ? Mar 25, 2024 12:47 |
|
|
# ? Mar 28, 2024 23:54 |
|
Millenium seemed a ton of fun during the demo. There's a neat little resource system, where you slowly turn stuff into fancier stuff as you progress. While picking your nation is meaningless (it changes your flag and city names), there seems to be a ton of flavour to wring out of the National Spirit system (kinda like Civ5's culture trees, except they're all tied to a specific resource). It's currently my most anticipated game, and I desperately hope they don't fumble the AI too much when it releases tomorrow.
|
# ? Mar 25, 2024 13:04 |
|
Later this year, Ara : History Untold will be released. Ara and Millenium could both be contenders to finally steal the Civ crown.
|
# ? Mar 25, 2024 13:31 |
|
John F Bennett posted:Later this year, Ara : History Untold will be released. Gameplay-wise, possibly, but it's a niche of a niche competition, and I doubt either can make a dent in Civ7's eventual numbers. I really want Civ to face some serious competition for 7, because their trajectory from 4 to 6 doesn't leave me with much hope. E: This was a dumb post, disregard.
|
# ? Mar 25, 2024 13:38 |
|
It might not have been properly timed for the post you replied to, but it's a fair sentiment. Two steps forward one step back is still progress, even if a frustrating one. None of the other 4Xs I've played have been been able to challenge Civ due to what I feel in hindsight is 'lategame play' - once you've already dumped ten-plus hours into getting good at the game and are now doing your second playthrough, is it still engaging? Does the competition provide enough tension, is the minutiae still fun? These are all valid criticisms of civ5 & 6, but in the other games it's just so much worse. I love ES2 to bits but the computer players can't build a military worth a drat much less aim for a victory condition, while various other 4Xs-of-the-day are just shoddy shallow junk. It's probably a very expensive genre to make a quality game in, honestly.
|
# ? Mar 25, 2024 13:59 |
|
I got a solid 20-30 hours out of Humankind. It hits the same itch but doesn’t scratch it nearly as well but could be a good change of pace if you grab it on sale.
|
# ? Mar 25, 2024 14:34 |
|
I got Millenia pre-ordered. I really enjoyed that demo and like what they're going for, and any 4x dev that remembers Call to Power's "resource pool used for building improvements instead of loving around with workers" design absolutely deserves the benefit of the doubt. I have way more faith in this new game than Amplitude with Humankind, I fuckin hated that thing. Civ killer my rear end, glad I didn't spend money on it apart from Game Pass
|
# ? Mar 25, 2024 15:16 |
|
Old World is the best Civ like since Call to Power II. It's biggest strength is its focusing down into one smaller period and place, this is also its greatest weakness compared to Civ.
|
# ? Mar 25, 2024 16:50 |
|
Sioux posted:Anyone ever co-opped this game? Theoretically it's PvE /and/ PvP, of course, but if you're in a voice chat with the other player I'm sure you could be allies and bully all other civs while creating really cool and cooperative civ's with the other player, with open borders, a lot of trade etc. I wonder though how boring it would be to wait through the other players turn. I've done a fair bit of co-op. It's a bit weird. You can't really affect one another that much. You share vision (except vision based on suzerainty), and when one of you gets a tech/civic it's boosted for the other. Other than that it's like you weren't on the same team, though there are a few things you can do to cooperate. You can do beneficial trades with one another (giving extra copies of luxuries, financing one another during times of crisis, etc.), you can defend one another, you can do alliances (which only really have a benefit if you can trade with one another, so that's geography dependent), you can cooperate on voting, and you can avoid building the same wonders at the same time. You essentially can't cooperate on science or culture victory, which are basically the only victory types that I (or my friend who I co-op with) find fun. In the late game, whoever is doing worse can't do much besides funnel money to whoever's doing better to slightly hasten their victory. Meanwhile, the AI, when teamed up together, does not act as if they are on a team. They'll boost each others' techs and civics, but that's about it. They don't vote together, making the world council kinda stupid. They don't come to one another's defense. Afaik they don't send each other money in times of crisis or otherwise make beneficial deals with one another. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to see an AI player start building a wonder that their partner is already building. So we treat the game more as a sandbox that we're both playing in together rather than a serious struggle for victory. We usually stop playing after a few hours and when it comes time to play again, rather than load our save we just start a new game.
|
# ? Mar 25, 2024 19:16 |
|
|
# ? Mar 28, 2024 23:54 |
|
Gaius Marius posted:Old World is the best Civ like since Call to Power II. It's biggest strength is its focusing down into one smaller period and place, this is also its greatest weakness compared to Civ. Agreed. Besides Civ it is by far my most played game in the genre. Humankind is next after that. Old World is a masterfully executed slice of history. Humankind is a gankily executed game with a massive, interesting scope. They’re both fun in their own way.
|
# ? Mar 25, 2024 20:03 |